• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. RIs from TS and 프라그마틱 추천 카지노 (webcastlist.com) ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for 프라그마틱 무료체험 (Https://Bookmarkrange.Com/Story19406993/7-Things-You-Ve-Never-Known-About-Pragmatic) collecting data.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 프라그마틱 체험 and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, 프라그마틱 환수율 슬롯체험 (moodjhomedia.com) which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.